An Era of Condemnation: Examining the U.S. House's Record-Breaking Term
The last twelve months in the House of Representatives has entered the history books. Congresspeople broke new marks for the longest floor speech and the lengthiest voting session, and presided over the most extended federal funding lapse.
Furthermore, legislators devoted considerable energy trying to reprimand each other through disciplinary motions, the chamber's official mechanism for disciplinary action. An examination of congressional records reveals a minimum of 17 attempts since the January to reproach a colleague via a reprimand or a less formal disapproval resolution.
If a censure measure passes by a majority of the chamber, the targeted lawmaker is required to stand before the rostrum as the chair announces to them that they face formal condemnation for their bad behavior. That's as far as the actual penalties – they keep their congressional office and their voting privileges, but perhaps not their reputation.
While nearly all of these passed, the flurry grew so intense that by the end of the year, a cross-party coalition proposed changing the procedures to create a higher bar for censures to succeed. “How about we stop the internal warfare in the House?” questioned one of the bill's sponsors.
What follows is a review at the alleged misdeeds at the center of the censure spree:
Referring to a Figure a ‘Derogatory Term’
The earliest condemnation effort of the year was introduced in February targeting a Democrat congressperson. The measure charged the member of “inciting violence against a designated official”. The resolution referenced an occasion during a panel session where the lawmaker made a derogatory comment about the individual in a rather roundabout manner, as well as a subsequent comment about using “physical force” to a political fight. The full body never considering the measure.
Shouting at the Commander-in-Chief
In the midst of a presentation to a gathering of Congress, a Democratic congressman interrupted the president, shouting “the people did not grant him authority” while waving a staff in the air. The presiding officer had the individual taken from the chamber. In the aftermath, a number of reprimand motions were introduced against the disruptor. Two days later, the legislature voted for one of these resolutions, with several members of the lawmaker's own political affiliation voting in favor alongside the majority party. This was the sole condemnation to actually win approval during the year.
Resorting to Ethnic Tropes
A mere few days after the previous censure, a resolution was proposed targeting a congressperson for statements made about the disruptive colleague. The proposal alleged the official of using language that was “disparaging, derogatory, and racist toward another colleague”. This resolution never came up for a full chamber vote.
Mocking a Governor's Disability
One more proposed censure centered on supposed derogatory comments made by a representative about a governor who has been paralyzed. The comments were viewed as highly offensive and resulted in a censure resolution that also was not brought to a floor vote.
Incident with Law Enforcement
Multiple censure resolutions were filed against a congresswoman after she was taken into custody and indicted following an incident outside a immigration detention center. One of these measures was brought up in the House, but was blocked thanks to a coalition of lawmakers from the other side and a small group of legislators from the resolution's party of origin. This represented the beginning of multiple occasions where members defied party loyalty to stop a reprimand motion.
Accusations of Discrimination
A congressman was the focus of multiple condemnation motions over the summer for offensive statements made about elected officials of color. The comments included insulting labels and calls for removal from the country. None of these resolutions was considered by the full House.
Criticizing a Individual's Actions
In the aftermath of a well-known individual's death, a condemnation motion was filed against a congresswoman for comments that were deemed “derogatory” toward the activist and those mourning him. Once again, the motion was defeated with the assistance of a few of lawmakers from the sponsor's own party. One of those who blocked the censure remarked that the proper response to “reprehensible speech” is not censorship, but “more speech”.
‘Undermining the System of a Free and Fair Election’
The flurry of reprimands peaked late in the year when, amid a pivotal vote, a representative took to the chamber to claim that a fellow Democrat had arranged to step down in a manner to practically guarantee a particular individual would be chosen to fill his seat. The disapproval motion registered dissent of this behavior for “undermining the process of a open electoral contest”. This resolution provoked anger but ultimately passed, with support from the majority of the opposing party and a significant number of members from the accuser's own party.
Exchanging Messages with a Notorious Figure
As a bill to force the disclosure of sealed records related to convicted criminal Jeffrey Epstein was approaching a vote, news broke that a lawmaker had exchanged text messages with Epstein in the midst of a 2019 hearing. Capitalizing on the situation, political opponents lawmakers proposed a reprimand motion against the representative. This measure was defeated thanks to united opposition from the member's own party and the defections of a small number of lawmakers from the party that introduced it.
A Wide Range of Claimed Transgressions
One congressman was the subject of several different reprimand efforts throughout the year, which resulted in {allegations|claims
